Not the price, the content (Score: 1) by spallshurgenson@pipedot.org on 2015-02-27 14:03 (#3YE5) Like many, I dropped my cable TV subscription some time ago. But it wasn't so much the cost that drove me away but the content. There wasn't anything I wanted to watch anymore. The interesting channels that originally made cable so exciting (History, TLC, Discovery, SciFi) had become so genericized that I might as well have been watching broadcast TV. More and more channels were resorting to "reality" shows, in which I have absolutely no interest. The news shows were just talking heads dealing superficially with the issue-of-the-day while ignoring more troublesome news. The movie channels kept showing the same films over and over again. And, oh God, the advertising! The marketing was becoming ever more discordant and shrill; it was like surfing the web without an ad-blocker.So I took stock of my watching habits; was there anything cable TV gave me that I couldn't do without? News and weather? I had stopped turning to the TV for that long ago; the web tended to be more timely and offer deeper* analysis. Movies? My DVD collection was fairly extensive and I preferred being able to watch a movie on my schedule rather than waiting for it to roll around on cable. TV shows? Well, there were a handful I would miss but most could be replaced either by streaming from the web or simply waiting for the seasonal compilation to hit retail in DVD format. And I wouldn't be inundated with adverts while watching them.I quit watching TV because they no longer had anything to offer me. That I was saving money in the bargain was just a nice bonus.If TV - whether it be broadcast or cable - wants to survive as a medium, it needs to start offering people a worthwhile product. Stop pushing the cheapest possible programs ("reality" TV), diversify your lineup (e.g., a History channel that actually is about history, and not pawn shops), and severely cut back on how many adverts intrude on the watching experience. Otherwise more and more people are going to realize your offerings are crap and look for something better on which to spend their money.* and seeing as how shallow a lot of web-based reporting is, that's a pretty damning statement on TV news Re: Not the price, the content (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on 2015-02-28 08:08 (#3ZW0) My first experience with paytv is when I visited my mother in the 90s. I could have spent half the trip watching tv. A lot of old tv shows and movies from the 60s 70s and 80s. It rocked. These days, paytv is not much different from TV. May as well just download stuff. Pity not everything is available. I would pay to be able to access old stuff.
Re: Not the price, the content (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on 2015-02-28 08:08 (#3ZW0) My first experience with paytv is when I visited my mother in the 90s. I could have spent half the trip watching tv. A lot of old tv shows and movies from the 60s 70s and 80s. It rocked. These days, paytv is not much different from TV. May as well just download stuff. Pity not everything is available. I would pay to be able to access old stuff.